A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why does the Gemara (גמרא) permit marriage between death and burial when mourning laws should apply? The Rambam (רמב"ם) distinguishes between two separate aspects of aveilus: kavod hameis (honoring the deceased) and achrisu ki yomar (personal trauma/bitterness). This framework explains when Chazal can override mourning obligations.
This shiur analyzes the complex Gemara (גמרא) in Kesubos 4a regarding the special heter to marry when the groom's father dies during wedding preparations. The Gemara permits marriage between the death (misa) and burial (kevura), followed by shiva and then sheva brachos. Rabbi Zweig examines the major dispute between the Rif/Bahag (who permit this sequence in multiple cases) and the Rosh (who only permits postponing the wedding). The central difficulty is understanding how Chazal can override Torah (תורה)-level mourning laws. The Ran explains that sages can nullify shev v'al ta'aseh (passive obligations) but cannot permit violations of kum v'aseh (active prohibitions) like celebrating during mourning.
Looking for the full summary?
Full access is available to members of the TUF Alumni Association or the Yam Hagadol Foundation.
Already a member? Let the admin know!
Kesubos 4a
Looking for the full transcript?
Full access is available to members of the TUF Alumni Association or the Yam Hagadol Foundation.
Already a member? Let the admin know!
Dedicate a Shiur in Gemara
L'ilui nishmas a loved one. In honor of a simcha or yahrzeit. As a zechus for a refuah sheleimah. Your dedication helps carry Rabbi Zweig's Torah to learners around the world.
When an animal damages crops, the Torah prescribes a unique payment formula based on multiplying the damaged area by sixty. Does this formula redefine the actual loss, or does it merely create a payment mechanism that still acknowledges the full damage sustained? The Gemara explores whether someone who ate in doubt should pay the higher-quality amount, examining how the principle of motzi me-chaveiro alav haraya applies when payments fall within the range of actual loss.
What makes testimony valid when different witnesses testify to different parts of the same event? The Gemara debates whether the principle of "davar v'lo chatzi davar" (complete testimony, not partial) disqualifies witnesses who testify separately to theft and slaughter. Rashi's approach reveals that the issue is not merely combining elements, but whether each witness's statement is independently meaningful.
Why is a ganav who sells a stolen animal on Shabbos exempt from the fourfold/fivefold payment? The shiur analyzes whether this exemption stems from kam lei b'derabbah or from the absence of a valid mechira. The Rashba's principle that matana resembles mechira when it is "nishtarish b'chet" is explored, along with the Rambam's position on hekdesh and the distinction between giving to bedek habayis versus mizbe'ach.
When a ganav shechts a stolen animal l'avodah zarah, why isn't he patur from payment since it's already isur hana'ah? The shiur explores the fundamental machloket Rashi-Tosafot on whether the isur derives from the act of shechita or from the din shechita itself. The Gemara's application of davar garem be'mamon ke'mamon domi extends the analysis to when borrowed animals become niskal.
